You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Estimating overannotation across prokaryotic genomes using BLAST+, UBLAST, LAST and BLAT
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-7-651 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gabriel Moreno-Hagelsieb, Brigitte Hudy-Yuffa |
| Abstract |
As the number of genomes in public databases increases, it becomes more important to be able to quickly choose the best annotated genomes for further analyses in comparative genomics and evolution. A proxy to annotation quality is the estimation of overannotation by comparing annotated coding genes against the SwissProt database. NCBI's BLAST (BLAST+) is the common software of choice to compare these sequences. Newer programs that run in a fraction of the time as BLAST+ might miss matches that BLAST+ would find. However, the results might still be useful to calculate overannotation. We thus decided to compare the overannotation estimates yielded using three such programs, UBLAST, LAST and the Blast-Like Alignment Tool (BLAT), and to test non-redundant versions of the SwissProt database to reduce the number of comparisons necessary. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 30% |
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 63% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 April 2016.
All research outputs
#13,179,664
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,616
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,485
of 225,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#60
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 225,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.